[Politics] The Labour Government

[Is it PotG?]

"Rachel Reeves has declined to back calls for the UK government to launch a “buy British” campaign in response to Donald Trump’s tariffs, saying it would make Britain too “inward-looking”.

Indeed, somebody has to keep buying iPhones and other Apple guff.

 

[WATFORD zero]

We don’t need the government’s backing or approval to buy British.

Indeed, I've conducted a 60+ year buy british campaign, regardless of Governments which seem to come and go

 

[A1X]

I'm not so sure, despite poor Nige's efforts to be more inclusive, I think it's still mainly focused on jowl wobbling, gammon faced Brexiteers, but still open to the more recent paedophile and rapist apologists

View attachment 199729

The 9% Remain voting people who’ve moved to Reform have certainly been on a journey in the last 9 years.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

..but not grown up enough to understand a horror film, yet they understand tax policy. Sounds sensible.

They are children!

Have you seen the mess the adults have made?

 

[SouthSaxon]

The US President is 78 years old and he doesn’t understand anything.

If voting rights were tied to a formula of intelligence and life experience, we’d have about 12 voters in the entire country.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Have you seen the mess the adults have made?

Christ knows we have to have hope in the future generations given what a complete clusterf*** the current generations have managed

 

[beorhthelm]

Confirmation of the the intent to lower the voting age today:

"If you're old enough to pay your taxes, then you are entitled to have a say on how your taxes are spent." PM

i wonder if they have much say on staying in education until 18, so they can go out to work full time?

 

[Chicken Run]

Confirmation of the the intent to lower the voting age today:

"If you're old enough to pay your taxes, then you are entitled to have a say on how your taxes are spent." PM

Couldn’t agree more, those 16-18 year olds that are out working and paying tax have every right to vote

 

[n1 gull]

Ah I remember the night I turned 18, I suddenly understood overnight the intricacies of tax policy, the full gamut of global diplomacy and industrial strategies which a mere 24 hours earlier had been complete mysteries to me, lost in the background of my knowledge of Fireman Sam and Thunderbirds.

..or maybe you studied Economics at A level

 

[Curious Orange]

Any child that has pocket money and buys a packet of sweets with it is a tax payer.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Couldn’t agree more, those 16-18 year olds that are out working and paying tax have every right to vote

Thousands do.

But are you advocating for those that don’t pay income tax to lose the right to vote (the unemployed, the profoundly disabled, those on benefits, the poorly, the prisoners)?

Of course not. The eligibility to work gives you the right to vote, not the fact you have current employment or not.

 

[A1X]

..or maybe you studied Economics at A level

Under the current rules most of those who are studying economics at A level can’t vote while Joey Essex, old people with dementia and Crystal Palace fans can, and I know who I trust more to understand about things

 

[Curious Orange]

Also, presumably if we're giving voting rights to 16 year olds we are now happy to send them to the front line again?

 

[Hugo Rune]

Also, presumably if we're giving voting rights to 16 year olds we are now happy to send them to the front line again?

Good point. On that logic, if you can’t join the army (those older than 36) and serve on the front line, should you have your voting rights withdrawn?

 

[Curious Orange]

Good point. On that logic, if you can’t join the army (those older than 36) and serve on the front line, should you have your voting rights withdrawn?

Logic certainly doesn't come into it, nobody becomes 'good'* at decision making at an arbitrary age, and taxation, benefits, and military service have no bearing on whether you should be able to vote. Wanting to lower the voting age strikes me as being an idealogical reform rather than a a pragmatic one.



* my emphasis - how do we define how good a decision is? We tend to become more risk-averse as we age, whereas teenage boys are more prone to making stupid decisions (as anyone related to one will tell you).

 

[Hugo Rune]

Logic certainly doesn't come into it, nobody becomes 'good'* at decision making at an arbitrary age, and taxation, benefits, and military service have no bearing on whether you should be able to vote. Wanting to lower the voting age strikes me as being an idealogical reform rather than a a pragmatic one.



* my emphasis - how do we define how good a decision is? We tend to become more risk-averse as we age, whereas teenage boys are more prone to making stupid decisions (as anyone related to one will tell you).

I agree.

But it’s all about balance. If very elderly adults can vote, why shouldn’t the very young adults?

People never lose the right to vote.

As we grow older, we tend to grow more adverse to change and our mental sharpness will often decline immeasurably. Change is an essential driver to the evolution of our society and country. Those who care for or look after the very old will know that decision making can be incredibly poor. A friend of mine is having to deal with a parent who discharged themselves from hospital against medical and family advice, that is the same sort of stress as those (who care for 16/17 year olds) can feel when teenager decisions, as you rightly point out, are stupid.

For me, they are all adults. Having the very old eligible to vote is the same as having the very young eligible to vote. Two groups that can show distinct patterns of poor decision making. Equality of age.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

"Rachel Reeves has declined to back calls for the UK government to launch a “buy British” campaign in response to Donald Trump’s tariffs, saying it would make Britain too “inward-looking”.

I'm Backing Britain - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[beorhthelm]

I agree.

But it’s all about balance. If very elderly adults can vote, why shouldn’t the very young adults?

under 18 are not considered adult though. does this change mean we're appling to all other legislation to consider them as adult, or just applies to voting? that's the problem with the logic, the change is inconsistent.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Also, presumably if we're giving voting rights to 16 year olds we are now happy to send them to the front line again?

Anyone who votes are going to be sent to the front line ?

 

[Chicken Run]

Thousands do.

But are you advocating for those that don’t pay income tax to lose the right to vote (the unemployed, the profoundly disabled, those on benefits, the poorly, the prisoners)?

Of course not. The eligibility to work gives you the right to vote, not the fact you have current employment or not.

The Prime Minister said
“I think that if you’re old enough to go out to work, if you’re old enough to pay your taxes, then you are entitled to have a say on how your taxes are spent”

Working 16 & 17 year olds pay millions into the treasury each year and it’s right that they should have a say on how their hard earned taxes are spent.